Bree Mobley, Annotation #4
“The Corporation
14 October 2011
1113 words
“The Corporation”, directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott, released in 2003
“The Corporation” is a film that illustrates the concept of the corporation throughout recent history up to its present-day dominance. Considering its legal status as person, the film evaluates the corporation’s behavior towards society as a psychiatrist might evaluate a single person. The document focuses on corporation in North America.
From this psychiatric evaluation the film goes through a number of examples to prove a series of personality traits of corporations that are synonymous with that of a psychopath. It starts off by giving a history of the development of the modern corporation: the corporation originated as a government-chartered institution that was legally bound to form and disassemble around the creation of a specific public function. Now, the modern commercial corporation is entitled to most of the legal rights of a person, as allowed by the passing and exploitation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since corporate power has risen, the film shows how they are systematically compelled to behave like a psychopath, exhibiting such behaviors as incapacity to maintain human relationships, reckless disregard for the safety of others, the incapacity to experience guilt, and the failure to conform to social norms and respect for the law. To talk about these behavioral traits, the film interviews prominent corporate critics and business professors from prestigious institutions. Also, interviews with CEOs from Interface, the carpet and fabric company, Goodyear, the tire company, and Shell, the crude oil refining and distributing company, help to portray the strength of the corporation beyond its individual leaders.
The film touches on Political, Legal, Economic, Behavioral, Organizational, Media and Informational sustainability problems.
The most compelling part of the film was the examples of crimes and psychopathic behaviors demonstrated by corporations. In 1989, a toxicology study was performed on cows in the United States revealing the presence of antibiotics and rBST. rBST was a drug, an artificial growth hormone, created and administered by the corporation Monsanto (a US-based multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation) as a way to increase milk production in dairy cows. However, after a series of bad situations resulting from this milk, it was discovered that people were consuming antibiotics via milk products. This is directly correlated to the rise of viruses and bacteria that cannot be treated by antibiotics, viruses such as staph infections that are not curable, and if not treated, could lead to fatalities. Monsanto stopped selling the drug but did not stop the momentum of their company and could not feel guilt for the problems it had begun. The inability to feel guilty is a characteristic of a psychopath.
What I found least compelling in the documentary was in the very beginning. The film opened up with a series of metaphors describing the corporation from different viewpoints. I felt that some of the examples were not explained well or should not have been mentioned. It did not initially draw me into the concept of the movie or help me understand the film’s goal in a clear, exact way. I thought that, although the examples were decent, none of them really made a big impression on me. One example of a corporation was an eagle; the narrator threw out some majestic sounding adjectives describing the lifestyle and characteristics of an eagle that could be applied loosely to that of a corporation. I was looking for a more impressive opening for this film.
I feel this film best addresses people who are involved in a corporation. It sheds a light on what a corporation could be doing outside the opinion or even knowledge of its individual employees. Even someone like the CEO cannot be held completely responsible for all the actions a corporation takes. The film also addresses the general public. It serves as an educational tool, aiming to cultivate passion amongst those not involved so that action can be taken to decrease the power and current legal rights a corporation has.
I think providing even more, extreme examples of corporate exploitation would have been effective in enhancing its environmental educational value. Examples that affected more the ecosystem of the planet rather than just the human effects of a corporation. There was one example where paper mills were dumping waste into a nearby river unbeknownst to its employees. I would have liked to see that subject explored more, the habitats effected by such dumping in addition to the human effects. Or perhaps providing some limitations that could be applied to the legal status of a corporation. I was hoping to hear about some laws and regulations that could be applied to corporations that would limit their status as a person.
I think some corrective actions that could be taken after seeing this film would be to recreate the way a corporation is viewed in a legal sense. Now I understand that laws cannot be undone, and the Fourteenth Amendment should definitely not be re-written. But there should be some way that we limit the freedom that that law allows to just individual people and not corporations. When corporations can take on the legal status of an individual, their power cannot be stopped. There’s no moral conscious embedded in a corporation like that in humans.
This film encouraged me to seek further information about the examples of corporate exploitation that were mentioned. I further researched the rBST and Monsanto scandal. I found that the effects of the growth hormone are still affecting people today, especially in the United States because the drug is still being given to our cows. rBST is banned in numerous other countries like Canada, Austrailia, and Japan and in some individual retailers and products in the United States. The effects in humans include higher susceptibility to untreatable viruses and tumors. No correlation between rBSt and cancer has been found. However, the error of new chemicals (mentioned in the film) that began in the 1940s and encouraged by large corporations looking to reduce time and improve efficiency of any products has most definitely contributed to the rise of cancer. The film also encouraged me to visit its website. Upon looking around, I found that a new effort supporting the movie is being launched. A revision of the film is taking place with new footage and designed to be shown in high schools. Hoping to inspire concern and passion in a younger generation, The Corporation is calling on students and teachers to launch clubs and a social media campaign across North America.
“The Corporation
14 October 2011
1113 words
“The Corporation”, directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott, released in 2003
“The Corporation” is a film that illustrates the concept of the corporation throughout recent history up to its present-day dominance. Considering its legal status as person, the film evaluates the corporation’s behavior towards society as a psychiatrist might evaluate a single person. The document focuses on corporation in North America.
From this psychiatric evaluation the film goes through a number of examples to prove a series of personality traits of corporations that are synonymous with that of a psychopath. It starts off by giving a history of the development of the modern corporation: the corporation originated as a government-chartered institution that was legally bound to form and disassemble around the creation of a specific public function. Now, the modern commercial corporation is entitled to most of the legal rights of a person, as allowed by the passing and exploitation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since corporate power has risen, the film shows how they are systematically compelled to behave like a psychopath, exhibiting such behaviors as incapacity to maintain human relationships, reckless disregard for the safety of others, the incapacity to experience guilt, and the failure to conform to social norms and respect for the law. To talk about these behavioral traits, the film interviews prominent corporate critics and business professors from prestigious institutions. Also, interviews with CEOs from Interface, the carpet and fabric company, Goodyear, the tire company, and Shell, the crude oil refining and distributing company, help to portray the strength of the corporation beyond its individual leaders.
The film touches on Political, Legal, Economic, Behavioral, Organizational, Media and Informational sustainability problems.
The most compelling part of the film was the examples of crimes and psychopathic behaviors demonstrated by corporations. In 1989, a toxicology study was performed on cows in the United States revealing the presence of antibiotics and rBST. rBST was a drug, an artificial growth hormone, created and administered by the corporation Monsanto (a US-based multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation) as a way to increase milk production in dairy cows. However, after a series of bad situations resulting from this milk, it was discovered that people were consuming antibiotics via milk products. This is directly correlated to the rise of viruses and bacteria that cannot be treated by antibiotics, viruses such as staph infections that are not curable, and if not treated, could lead to fatalities. Monsanto stopped selling the drug but did not stop the momentum of their company and could not feel guilt for the problems it had begun. The inability to feel guilty is a characteristic of a psychopath.
What I found least compelling in the documentary was in the very beginning. The film opened up with a series of metaphors describing the corporation from different viewpoints. I felt that some of the examples were not explained well or should not have been mentioned. It did not initially draw me into the concept of the movie or help me understand the film’s goal in a clear, exact way. I thought that, although the examples were decent, none of them really made a big impression on me. One example of a corporation was an eagle; the narrator threw out some majestic sounding adjectives describing the lifestyle and characteristics of an eagle that could be applied loosely to that of a corporation. I was looking for a more impressive opening for this film.
I feel this film best addresses people who are involved in a corporation. It sheds a light on what a corporation could be doing outside the opinion or even knowledge of its individual employees. Even someone like the CEO cannot be held completely responsible for all the actions a corporation takes. The film also addresses the general public. It serves as an educational tool, aiming to cultivate passion amongst those not involved so that action can be taken to decrease the power and current legal rights a corporation has.
I think providing even more, extreme examples of corporate exploitation would have been effective in enhancing its environmental educational value. Examples that affected more the ecosystem of the planet rather than just the human effects of a corporation. There was one example where paper mills were dumping waste into a nearby river unbeknownst to its employees. I would have liked to see that subject explored more, the habitats effected by such dumping in addition to the human effects. Or perhaps providing some limitations that could be applied to the legal status of a corporation. I was hoping to hear about some laws and regulations that could be applied to corporations that would limit their status as a person.
I think some corrective actions that could be taken after seeing this film would be to recreate the way a corporation is viewed in a legal sense. Now I understand that laws cannot be undone, and the Fourteenth Amendment should definitely not be re-written. But there should be some way that we limit the freedom that that law allows to just individual people and not corporations. When corporations can take on the legal status of an individual, their power cannot be stopped. There’s no moral conscious embedded in a corporation like that in humans.
This film encouraged me to seek further information about the examples of corporate exploitation that were mentioned. I further researched the rBST and Monsanto scandal. I found that the effects of the growth hormone are still affecting people today, especially in the United States because the drug is still being given to our cows. rBST is banned in numerous other countries like Canada, Austrailia, and Japan and in some individual retailers and products in the United States. The effects in humans include higher susceptibility to untreatable viruses and tumors. No correlation between rBSt and cancer has been found. However, the error of new chemicals (mentioned in the film) that began in the 1940s and encouraged by large corporations looking to reduce time and improve efficiency of any products has most definitely contributed to the rise of cancer. The film also encouraged me to visit its website. Upon looking around, I found that a new effort supporting the movie is being launched. A revision of the film is taking place with new footage and designed to be shown in high schools. Hoping to inspire concern and passion in a younger generation, The Corporation is calling on students and teachers to launch clubs and a social media campaign across North America.
"Bovine Somatotropin." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_Growth_Hormone>.
The Corporation Film: Welcome. Big Picture Media Corporation. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. <http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm>.